The influence of employee motivation onknowledge transfer

Natalia Martın Cruz, Vıctor Martın Perez and Celina Trevilla Cantero

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the effect of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation as

determinants of the employees’ knowledge transfer in the context of a Spanish non-profit organization

(named Asprona).

Design/methodology/approach – A case study method was used to analyze a Spanish non-profit

organization (Asprona). In this context, a qualitative and quantitative analysis with a sample of 76 people

was performed using the partial least squares approach (PLS), in order to test the research hypotheses.

Findings – The research findings show that, in Asprona, knowledge transfer improves through intrinsic

motivation, however extrinsic motivation is not significant on knowledge transfer. This result is interesting

bearing in mind that people are involved with a non-profit organization due to intrinsic reasons rather

than for financial rewards.

Research limitations/implications – This research is focused on one organization – Asprona’s

assistance area – and recommendations to other non-profit organizations must, therefore, be very

cautious.

Practical implications – Besides the importance to promote knowledge transfer through intrinsic

motivation in non-profit organizations, the authors recommend managers to design the mechanisms to

convert tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge, to guarantee that knowledge remains in the

organization. Also, the authors consider that managers in profit organizations can find these

suggestions useful in their context, due to the organization’s commitment that is created by means of

intrinsic motivation.

Originality/value – Few empirical studies have been developed in the non-profit sector, even though it

has an important economical and social role in society.

Keywords Motivation (psychology), Voluntary organizations, Knowledge transfer

Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction

Knowledge transfer within an organization enables employees to work together efficiently,

and, thus, is essential to efficient management. Thus, managers are motivated to maximize

knowledge transfer among their employees not only to generate extrinsic motivation results,

such as a high quality of personal and professional life, but also to develop intrinsically held

ideals, such as a strong commitment to the organization that allows them to visualize their

professional development with greater autonomy inside a pleasant work environment and in

line with their ethical and moral values. According, managers should encourage their

employees to transfer knowledge as a means to enhance their organizations’ efficiency.

Within non-profit organizations, stakeholders tend to have a higher degree of intrinsic

motivation because, traditionally, compensation levels are below market average and

non-profit employees are more likely to report that their work is more important to them than

the money they earn (Mirvis and Hackett, 1983). Thus, among non-profit organizations,

knowledge transfer is not solely the product of extrinsic motivation – traditionally considered

Natalia Martın Cruz,

Vıctor Martın Perez and

Celina Trevilla Cantero are

all based at the University of

Valladolid, Valladolid,

Spain.

PAGE 478 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT j VOL. 13 NO. 6 2009, pp. 478-490, Q Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 1367-3270 DOI 10.1108/13673270910997132

by organizational literature – because individuals have a high degree of intrinsic motivation

and, perhaps, even a limited degree of extrinsic motivation.

Although theoretical literature recognizes the importance of both intrinsic and extrinsic

motivation, no significant body of empirical research has evaluated the effect of the

difference between extrinsic and intrinsic motivation factors on employee knowledge

transfer behaviors (Lin, 2007). Following the knowledge-based view of the firm, this study

examines the importance of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation as determinants of the

employees’ knowledge transfer. An empirical analysis in a non-profit organization context

due to the relevance of intrinsic motivation in these types of organizations is performed.

The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 discusses the influence of

intrinsic and extrinsic motivation on knowledge transfer, based on prior literature. Section 3

explains the methodology and case study and develops the empirical measures of the

variables. Section 4 presents the results and main findings of the empirical analysis. Section

5 provides conclusions, and discusses limitations of the study as well as implications for

future research.

2. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation as knowledge transfer facilitators

Most individuals desire more from their jobs than simple extrinsic compensation. They may

be motivated by numerous factors such as a pleasant work environment where they can

apply all their capacities and collaborate with interesting people, working in an atmosphere

of mutual respect, the possibility of experiencing feelings of accomplishment and

self-respect when they perform well, the provisions for adequate leisure time, feelings of

power and prestige, a low-stress, slower pace of work, or involvement with an organization

that has values and goals similar to their own. As such, intrinsic motivation is not necessarily

controllable by the organization; however, non-profits may use it to support self-selection

and processes of attracting committed employees (Handy and Katz, 1998; Roomkin and

Weisbrod, 1999; Merchant et al., 2003) for whom intrinsic rewards are an important source of

motivation. Thus, non-profit employees may be intrinsically motivated to share their

knowledge related to their own individual learning processes (Huysman and deWit, 2004) or

because they expect or hope for reciprocity, that is, that others will also share knowledge

that may be useful to them (Hendriks, 1999). As Tampoe (1996) notes, knowledge-transfer

workers are influenced by personal growth, operational autonomy, and task achievement

rather than by financial rewards. Moreover, Ryan and Deci (2000) recognize that feelings of

competence will not enhance intrinsic motivation unless they are accompanied by a sense of

autonomy, thus people must not only experience perceived competence (or self-efficacy),

they must also experience their behavior to be self-determined if intrinsic motivation is to be

maintained or enhanced.

These strong connections to factors beyond extrinsic rewards show the considerable

influence that intrinsic motivation exerts over knowledge transfer, thus improving individuals’

propensity to share their knowledge with other organizational members and facilitating

learning processes, which are vital issues at a time when the ability to learn more and learn

faster than one’s competitors is often an organization’s only sustainable competitive

advantage (Slater and Narver, 1995).

Intrinsic motivation is, therefore, a powerful tool to overcome barriers that hinder knowledge

transfer among employees. Specifically, intrinsic motivation enables the development of

informal groups outside formal organizational structures and allows rapid problem solving,

the transfer of improved practices, and the development of professional abilities. Likewise,

intrinsic motivation may help to achieve a more productive balance between individual

competition and collaboration, because it favors a greater level of cooperation; namely,

higher knowledge transfer induced by higher intrinsic motivation reduces excessive

competition that hinders apprenticeship and collaboration (Kofman and Senge, 1993).

Furthermore, intrinsic motivation promotes a working environment that expedites both formal

and informal communication, which entails greater transfer and acquisition of knowledge as

well as the development of behaviors that strengthen organizational learning (Slater and

VOL. 13 NO. 6 2009 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENTj PAGE 479

Narver, 1995). Intrinsic motivation may also increase employees’ commitment to the

organization because it creates a desire for self-improvement as a means to support the

organization, bringing about the development of ‘‘learn to learn’’ capabilities. In the same

way, intrinsic motivation helps eradicate a lack of work-related challenges, because the

increment of responsibilities increases the necessity of knowledge sharing. In the same

manner, intrinsic motivation favors decision making consensus, which requires a significant

commitment among different groups of employees (Walsh, 1995). Also, intrinsic motivation

combats the ‘‘external enemy syndrome’’[1], therefore, individuals who feel secure in their

job positions will analyze the causes of an existing problem, collect the required knowledge,

and propose a solution without fear of retribution. Finally, the commitment to the organization

and personal development – distinctive features of intrinsic motivation – make it easier to

emerge employees mental models and explore and analyze them to observe how they

influence individuals’ behavior within the organization by removing negative aspects and

creating new, better functioning models.

Thus, intrinsic motivation performs two significant roles in the knowledge transfer process.

First, it is a reward of the process itself, and, second, it promotes individual participation in

the knowledge transfer process (Lucas and Ogilvie, 2006). Specifically, intrinsic motivation

enables the generation and transfer of knowledge under conditions in which extrinsic

motivation fails (Osterloh and Frey, 2000). As McDermott and O’Dell (2001) point out,

organizations that recognize their employees’ efforts, abilities, and accomplishments

provide intrinsic motivation for them to transfer their knowledge, thus leading to the first

hypothesis:

H1. The higher the intrinsic motivation an employee has, the more the knowledge the

employee is willing to transfer.

On the other hand, extrinsic motivation is considered as the set of monetary rewards – both

direct (e.g. wages, incentives, bonus) and indirect (e.g. time not worked, training,

contributions to employees’ benefit plans such as medical dental and life insurance, fringe

benefits, expense account, and other allowances) – that individuals receive in exchange for

their job. These external incentives motivate employees to perform valuable tasks for the

organization (Prendergast, 1999; Bonner and Sprinkle, 2002). Employees are extrinsically

motivated if they are able to satisfy their needs indirectly, especially through monetary

compensation. It is quite possible that greater emphasis on monetary incentives will begin to

attract individuals who value economic wealth more highly (Perry and Porter, 1982). That is,

money is a ‘‘goal which provides satisfaction irrespective of the actual activity itself’’

(Osterloh and Frey, 2000, p. 2). Although these organizational rewards may provide

temporary incentives for knowledge sharing, they are not a fundamental force in forming

employees’ knowledge-sharing behaviors (Lin, 2007).

However, the literature is not in full agreement on the effectiveness of extrinsic motivation on

the transfer of knowledge. Lucas and Ogilvie (2006) recognize that prior research on

knowledge transfer and extrinsic motivation suggests a significant and positive relation

between these variables, even though they find no support in their study for the role of

extrinsic motivation on knowledge transfer. Bock et al. (2005) find that extrinsic rewards exert

a negative effect on an individual’s knowledge-sharing attitudes and that expected

organizational rewards do not significantly influence employee attitudes and behavioral

intentions regarding knowledge sharing (Lin, 2007). Osterloh and Frey (2000) point out that

the generation and transfer of knowledge are more important for intrinsically motivated

employees than for those extrinsically motivated. Finally, in her quantitative survey, Burgess

(2005) finds that employees who perceive greater organizational rewards for knowledge

sharing spend more hours sharing knowledge beyond their immediate teammates.

In this study, the authors suggest that a ‘‘crowding-out’’ effect does not exist between

extrinsic and intrinsic motivations and that a positive relation between extrinsic motivation

and knowledge transfer exists because to transfer knowledge, employees need to feel that

the organization provides something concrete and meaningful to them – something that

provides quality of life and not simply membership and recognition. Several organizations

PAGE 480 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENTj VOL. 13 NO. 6 2009

have designed reward systems to encourage employees to share their knowledge with

others (Bartol and Srivastava, 2002), because willingness to share usually depends on

reciprocity. The idea is that individuals are motivated through commitment and that

compensation is used as a fair exchange (Hall, 2001). Accordingly, employees who feel

adequately rewarded will develop a strong commitment to the organization, will remain for

extended periods of time, and will create and transfer knowledge among themselves, thus

improving their performance. Rewards also play a role in such a knowledge-sharing

mechanism in that the perceived fairness of reward system assists in the development of

trust between an individual and the organization (Bartol and Srivastava, 2002). Hansen et al.

(2002) suggest that an important aspect of rewards is the instrumentality, that it is simply a

‘‘means to an end’’ or an ‘‘in order to’’ relationship. Thus, extrinsic motivation may lead to

employees to need to voluntarily transfer their knowledge.

The authors suggest that, even though extrinsic rewards may not be the primary motivation

for knowledge transfer, they can be a powerful tool for generating a baseline commitment to

the organization, because employees must first satisfy their financial needs to sustain a

good quality of life. Therefore, if they are satisfied with the extrinsic rewards provided by their

organization, they will be more productive and creative, able to take the initiative, and

ultimately, ready and willing to transfer their knowledge to others within the organization.

Accordingly, the second hypothesis is proposed:

H2. The higher the extrinsic motivation an employee has, the more the knowledge the

employee is willing to transfer.

3. Methodology

The case study (Yin, 2003) is used as method of analysis to reach the proposed goal of the

research. Taking into account that this analysis requires detailed information about each

individual and the authorization of the non-profit’s management to acquire it – as well as the

specific hypotheses proposed about the relation between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation

and knowledge transfer- the research nature is quite explicative (Scapens, 1990).

Following Yin (2003), the authors place a great emphasis on the validity of the internal and

external constructs and the reliability of the research in order to ensure that the relations

between the analyzed variables are correctly based and that the results among the variables

can be generalized to other non-profits (at least, concerning social action or disabilities). The

authors also attempt to ensure that the measures are well-built to assess the defined

variables. Finally, the authors focus on the reliability of the research results – that is, that they

are stable, precise, and robust (i.e. we repeatedly obtain the same results with other

interviews, other surveys, and over different periods of time).

Furthermore, to restrict the research’s complexity, the three dimensions through which a

case complexity is valuated were balanced. In this way, the authors focus on one

organization, take the employee as unit of analysis, and perform an intra-organizational

analysis.

In the case study, a Spanish non-profit association (Asprona), which cares for people with

mental disabilities in the city of Valladolid, Spain, and the surrounding region, was analyzed.

This is a non-profit organization, with a declared social interest and public utility intent,

Asprona was founded in 1962 and has since been working on behalf of people with

intellectual disabilities and their families to improve their quality of life. In the national scope,

‘‘ Intrinsic motivation is a powerful tool to overcome barriersthat hinder knowledge transfer among employees. ’’

VOL. 13 NO. 6 2009 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENTj PAGE 481

Asprona belongs to the National Confederation of Associations, a lobby group that

combines the forces of these types of non-profit organizations to promote innovative and

efficient initiatives in organization and service provision. Asprona has 1,353 members, 897

employees (of whom 567 are disabled); it takes care of 1,445 people and has 140

volunteers. Throughout its history, Asprona has created and developed an extended

network of services and centers to support and satisfy the multiple needs and requests of its

clients over their life cycle. The activities carried out by the organization to achieve its goals

are structured in three main areas: assistance, labor, and associative[2].

3.1 The assistance area: the sample

Specifically, the information for this study was obtained from the assistance area (270

employees), whose mission is to satisfy the assistance and educative needs and to improve

the quality of life of people with intellectual disabilities and their families through the

promotion and management of social programs and services. The assistance area is

composed of five centers: early care, school services, residential services, day centers and

leisure time and sport services (see Figure 1).

Within Asprona’s assistance area, the individual – namely, the organization’s employees

(primarily psychologists, social workers, social educators, and physiotherapists) – is the unit

of analysis. In other words, employees without disabilities who work with people with

disabilities. The final sample consists of 76 employees. Considering that the total pool of

employees from the assistance area is 270, the participation obtained was 28.15 percent.

3.2 Data collection

Multiple information sources were used to obtain the required data from Asprona and carry

out the methodological triangulation to avoid internal validity problems. The data were

collected in two phases: first, the authors decided to accomplish in-depth interviews in order

to gather useful information about non-profits in general, and concretely about Asprona, so,

it would be possible to design the most suitable instrument for data collecting. Accordingly,

the authors performed in-depth interviews with the director of the assistance area, the

directors of the centers and the chairperson, as well as several key employees from different

centers. Furthermore, multiple documents, including the organization’s web page, annual

reports and internal operating documents were consulted.

Second, the information concerning knowledge transfer and motivation variables was

gathered through a questionnaire adapted for non-profits (one that could be used in other

organizations to ensure its external validity). A pre-test was previously completed to adapt

the questionnaire to the specificities of the involved organization. Once the pretest phase

was finished, the questionnaire was distributed by the assistance area director to all the

centers. The questionnaire for employees in the assistance area (seven-point Likert scale)

was:

Figure 1 Asprona’s internal structure

PAGE 482 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENTj VOL. 13 NO. 6 2009

B I receive a fixed salary (base salary, complements, etc) for my activity in the organization

(High Powered Incentives)

B The organization recognizes expressly my job (through rewards, mentions in the

organization’s magazine, intranet, advertisement board, etc.) (Recognition).

B The organization offers me the possibility for promotion (Promotion).

B The organization offers stability and continuity in my job (Stability).

B My activity in the organization let’s me improve as a person, enhance my self-confidence,

get mature, self-accomplish. . . (Self-Confidence).

B I have autonomy in my job and I can contribute with my ideas (Autonomy).

B I consider this organization honest and coherent with its mission (Honesty).

B I have an organization’s sense of belonging (I feel myself as an organization member,

loyal and involved to it) (Membership)).

B With my activity in the organization, I learn new things that only my partners know

(Learning).

B With my activity in the organization, I share actively my ideas and opinions (Ideas

sharing).

B With my activity in the organization, I share actively my knowledge and experience

(Knowledge sharing).

B In general, all the decisions that affect my job are taken by consensus (Consensus).

B With my activity in the organization I have frequent contacts (e-mail, phone, etc. . .) with

other employees (Contacts).

The information obtained through in-depth interviews was quite interesting: the employees

interviewed have been working for the organization for a long time, from 10 to 27 years;

hence, the knowledge and experience they have achieved are both important. The

knowledge transfer is usually generated daily through meetings where ideas, proposals,

and so on emerge and later are transformed into programs and activities. Asprona provides

training to its employees, which provides them skills to perform better in their work with

people with disabilities. However, tacit knowledge conversion into explicit knowledge is not a

systematic process, so, there are employees who do not necessarily create a formalized

structure of knowledge transfer (e.g. writing things down) because it would restrict their

initiative and creativity.

Overall, the interviewed employees are motivated by the ability to collaborate to improve the

quality of life of people with disabilities and their families. Even though they agree that their

salary is lower than the labor market average, the working environment, the possibility to do

something for someone in need, job position autonomy and the freedom to make decisions,

a convenient work schedule, and job flexibility are some of the reasons employees used to

justify their long permanence in the organization. Consequently, the authors claim that

employees interviewed feel committed to Asprona.

Thus, in-depth interviews provided useful information to make a preliminary analysis in

Asprona’s assistance area, which was confirmed with the information obtained by means of

the questionnaires.

3.3 Variables

The relevant variables to this study are extrinsic motivation, intrinsic motivation, and

knowledge transfer. To capture the dimensions of these variables, a set of multi-item

instruments that draw on previous empirical research was used. The employees were asked

to rate their degree of agreement with each of the items measured on a Likert-type scale

from 1 (totally disagree) to 7 (totally agree).

When measures to assess possible motivation mechanisms are established, two problems

are encountered: the scarce empirical evidence about this question within the framework of

VOL. 13 NO. 6 2009 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENTj PAGE 483

non-profit sector and the restrictions that non-profit organizations face in using incentives –

both from a social and a practical application point of view – to improve their employees

motivation and align their interests with the organization goals because, unlike for-profit

organizations, they cannot offer such incentives as stock grants, profit sharing, or bonuses

linked to sales volume increases or the appreciation of the stock market. For these reasons,

an instrument adapted to the singularities of the organization under analysis was developed,

based on prior empirical research (see for example Cyert and March, 1963; Collins and

Yeager, 1988; Leete, 2000; Zarraga and Bonache, 2003). However, even though these

measures have been previously validated by several authors, a confirmatory factor analysis

to guarantee their validity and reliability was performed.

A construct for extrinsic motivation was developed, which is defined as external rewards, that

includes four items based on prior empirical studies: expense account and allowances linked

to the activity performed (High-powered incentives) (Collins and Yeager, 1988; Finkelstein

and Hambrick, 1989; Balkin and Gomez-Mejia, 1990), labor stability (Stability) (Delaney and

Huselid, 1996), the organizational recognition (Recognition) (Guallino and Prevot, 2008), and

promotion (Promotion) (Challagalla and Shervani, 1996; Delaney and Huselid, 1996).

Intrinsic motivation, identified with the satisfaction that a person receives from his or her

position or work environment, was measured using four items: self-confidence and

self-fulfillment (Self-confidence) (Oliver and Anderson, 1994; Challagalla and Shervani,

1996), involvement and sense of belonging (Membership) (Leete, 2000), the feeling of

working for a honest organization (Honesty) (Robinson, 1996; Tyler, 2003) and, autonomy in

the performance of activities (Autonomy) (Das and Joshi, 2007).

With regard to dependent variables, knowledge transfer was measured using an adapted

versionof theZarragaandBonache(2003), Bocket al. (2005) andKoet al. (2005) instruments,

which includes the following items: The employee actively shares ideas and opinions (Ideas

sharing); theemployeeactively shares knowledgeandexperiences (Knowledgesharing); the

employee considers that his or her activity in the organization allows him or her to garner new

knowledge from other employees (Learning); the employee keeps in frequent contact with

other colleagues (CONTACTS); and, finally, the employee believes that consensus decision

making commonly influences issues related to his or her job (Consensus).

3.4 Data analysis

A partial least squares approach (PLS) was used to test the research hypotheses. In PLS,

measurement and structural parameters are estimated via an iterative procedure which

combines simple andmultiple regression by ordinary least squares (OLS), thus avoiding any

distributional assumption of the observed variables. Moreover, due to the partial nature of

this methodology, where the model parameters are estimated in blocks, the sample size

required in PLS is much smaller. The model in this research includes both latent (measured

with reflective indicators) and emergent (formative) constructs (Table I). In particular,

intrinsic and extrinsic motivation are composites formed or caused by the corresponding

observed variables, while the knowledge transfer constitutes unobserved variables

reflected in a set of manifest variables.

The model was estimated using SmartPLS 2.00 M3 (Ringle et al., 2005). Since traditional

parametric tests are inappropriate when no assumption is made about the distribution of the

observed variables, the level of statistical significance of the coefficients of both the

‘‘ Intrinsic motivation is the most important element forknowledge contribution (sharing and transmitting thisknowledge within the organization to other stakeholders). ’’

PAGE 484 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENTj VOL. 13 NO. 6 2009

measurement and the structural models was determined through a bootstrap re-sampling

procedure (500 sub-samples were randomly generated). Structural evaluation was

conducted by examining the size and significance of the path coefficients and the R 2

values of the dependent variables.

4. Results

The information obtained by means of the questionnaire for a sample of 76 employees in

Asprona’s Assistance Area allows the authors to test the research hypotheses. As Table I

shows, all the items concerning intrinsic motivation and knowledge transfer have an average

above 4 (on a scale from 1 to 7).

Following the two-step approach suggested by Anderson and Gerbing (1988), before

testing and assessing the structural model, the authors analyzed the reliability of individual

reflective items and the corresponding constructs, as well as the convergent validity and

discriminant validity of the measures. As can be observed in Table I, all the reflective item

loadings are significant and greater than 0.6. The authors evaluated composite reliability

using the internal consistency measure (rc) developed by Fornell and Larcker (1981) and

the average variance extracted (AVE) of each latent construct. The reflective construct

exceeds the conditions of rc greater than 0.7 and AVE greater than 0.5.

Discriminant validity can be obtained by calculating the cross-loadings. It was verified that

each reflective item loads more on the construct it intends to measure than on any other

construct, and that each latent variable relates more to its own manifest variables than to the

indicators of other constructs (Table II). For emergent constructs (intrinsic and extrinsic

motivation), in Table I weights instead of loadings are reported. Item weight represents its

relative contribution in the formation of the corresponding construct. It is necessary to bear in

mind that neither is it assumed nor required that formative indicators are correlated;

therefore, traditional measures of internal consistency and validity assessment are

inappropriate and illogical (Rodrıguez Pinto et al. 2008).

Figure 2 summarizes the results of the PLS analysis performed to test the structural model. In

particular, the standardized coefficients (b), the significance level (t statistic) and the value

of the R 2 of the dependent variable are shown. H1 is supported. In fact, only the link between

intrinsic motivation and knowledge transfers (contributions) is supported (H1: b ¼ 0.72,

p , 0.001). When employees are intrinsically motivated, they are willing to contribute with

their knowledge to the rest of employees. However, the extrinsic motivation is not significant

on knowledge contribution and then, H2 is not supported (H2: b ¼ 0.20, n.s.). This result is

interesting bearing in mind that people is involved to a non-profit organization due to intrinsic

Table I Descriptive statistics and convergent validity

Variables and measured items Mean SD Loading Weights t statistic

Extrinsic motivation (n.a.)High powered incentives 1.22 0.81 0.5896 2.6151Recognition 2.20 1.56 0.4778 1.7277Promotion 3.25 2.12 0.8746 6.0178Stability 5.08 1.75 0.1197 0.0478Intrinsic motivation (n.a.)Self-confidence 4.37 1.78 0.7157 2.9600Autonomy 5.16 1.41 20.0947 0.7758Honesty 4.45 1.88 0.0802 1.4051Membership 4.42 1.93 0.7677 3.6108Knowledge contributions (rc ¼ 0.96, AVE ¼ 0.83, a Cronbach ¼ 0.95)Learning 4.52 1.93 0.9115 8.8734Ideas sharing 4.44 1.83 0.9829 72.1276Knowledge sharing 4.62 1.79 0.7770 4.0540Consensus 4.12 1.87 0.9822 45.4829Contacts 3.95 2.17 0.8541 7.8152

VOL. 13 NO. 6 2009 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENTj PAGE 485

reasons. Intrinsic motivation is the most important element for knowledge contribution

(sharing and transmitting this knowledge within the organization to other stakeholders).

To conclude, the model presented in this paper exhibits an acceptable capacity to explain

how intrinsicmotivation is affecting knowledge transfers (see theR 2 values of these variables

in Figure 2). The paper establishes that there is not a ‘‘crowding-out’’ effect between intrinsic

and extrinsic motivation, on the contrary there is a mutual reinforcement between them. The

authors suppose that the correlation between the intrinsic and extrinsic motivation variables

may be the cause that, finally, extrinsic motivation lacks of effect (see Table III).

5. Conclusions, managerial implications, limitations and future extensions

Knowledge transfer, a key element in knowledge management, has achieved recognition

nowadays for the important role it plays in creating sustainable competitive advantages and

organizational efficiency. Notwithstanding whether employees are willing to transfer and

share their knowledge, contributing to the organizational efficiency is not without cost.

Employees need to perceive that their organization values them by providing suitable work

conditions that allow them to progress, both personally and professionally, and also, they

Figure 2 Structural model results

Table II Discriminant validity (cross-loadings)

Intrinsic motivation Extrinsic motivation Knowledge contribution

High powered incentives 0.469 0.630 0.424Recognition 0.479 0.505 0.340Promotion 0.603 0.932 0.627Stability 20.096 0.007 0.005Self-confidence 0.789 0.752 0.654Autonomy 20.074 20.051 20.061Honesty 0.078 20.054 0.065Membership 0.807 0.381 0.669Learning 0.771 0.607 0.918Ideas sharing 0.834 0.691 0.981Knowledge sharing 0.613 0.442 0.802Consensus 0.834 0.691 0.981Contacts 0.696 0.602 0.861

PAGE 486 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENTj VOL. 13 NO. 6 2009

need to feel satisfied and a sense of well-being with the activities performed. For these

reasons, intrinsic motivation reaches a high importance for managers.

However, looking at the results of our study, extrinsic motivation, such as high-powered

incentives provided by the organization and offered to the employees, is not necessary for

them to transfer their knowledge. It is intrinsic motivation, generated internally by the

individual, which has been proven to have a better effect on the employee’s performance,

because it implies employee’s commitment to the organization. Therefore, non-profit

organizations – specifically, those focused on social action – may find intrinsic motivations

particularly important in getting their employees to achieve the organizational goals and

mission in the most efficient manner. This type of organization is a good example how

intrinsic motivation can influence employees to stay in the organization for a long time, which

enables them to increase and share their knowledge with the rest of the employees and build

their skill base and experiences to the benefit of organizational efficiency.

Thus, the results confirm one of the hypotheses. The study verifies that more intrinsically

motivated employees more actively transfer their knowledge, and the level of extrinsic

motivation of Asprona’s employees is not a significant determinant to foster employees’

knowledge transfer.

In non-profit organizations is difficult to evaluate how intrinsic motivation is leading to a better

organizational performance and, sometimes, managers prefer to use extrinsic tools to get

the employees attached and involved in the organization. Using the knowledge-based

approach, we go a step further giving light to this debate, claiming that if an organization

creates the environment to motivate intrinsically its employees they will be willing to transfer

their knowledge and accept and capture the knowledge of the rest of the employees. All this

process makes the organization to be better off. Extrinsic motivation is not enough to retain

and use effectively employees’ knowledge and, additionally, is not significant for knowledge

transfer. Managers should use this evidence by trying to involve deeply their employees in

the organization’s mission and strategy, and making them to feel that they are part of the

organization.

Accordingly, managers should design the mechanisms to convert tacit knowledge into

explicit knowledge, so the organization can achieve an organizational memory, which makes

efficiency over time possible, even if employees retire or resign from the organization.

However, this research is based just in one organization, and recommendations to other

non-profit organizations must, therefore, be very cautious. Besides that, the authors have

just studied the assistance area, in the future the labor area will be studied, and therefore, a

full view of the organization will be reached.

Table III Correlations between latent variables

Extrinsic motivation Intrinsic motivation Knowledge transfer

Extrinsic motivation 1 0 0Intrinsic motivation 0.6909 1 0Knowledge transfer 0.6732 0.8287 1

‘‘ Employees need to perceive that their organization valuesthem by providing suitable work conditions that allow them toprogress, both personally and professionally, and also, theyneed to feel satisfied and have a sense of well-being with theactivities performed. ’’

VOL. 13 NO. 6 2009 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENTj PAGE 487

The findings of this research could be affected by national issues so it is necessary to put

them in context taking into account the specific environment in which the organization under

analysis is performing its activities. Family is a fundamental institution in Spain. Bearing in

mind that the welfare state has not a long tradition in this country since it is one of the

youngest democracies in Western Europe, certain services that in other industrialized

countries are provided by the social services of the central government, were assumed by

Spanish families. However, the complexity of the assistance and educative needs of people

with intellectual disabilities demands a professional provision. Many of the involved families

made the decision to set up a non-profit organization so that they could have access to a

greater amount of funds to channel it in order to improve the quality of life of their disabled

relatives. This task had not been necessary if the welfare state was sufficiently developed to

give an adapted response to the specific needs of this group of disabled people.

Notes

1. The ‘‘external enemy syndrome’’ is a situation in which the identification that the individual has with

his own job position decreases his propensity to transfer knowledge in order to avoid that others

take advantage of his own capabilities.

2. The labor area creates and promotes employment for disabled people, principally with intellectual

disability, offering its clients (companies and public institutions) the best quality in products and

services. Asprona’s assistance area takes care of the assistance and educative needs of people

with intellectual disability through their whole life. The associative area integrates the associated

members in the political-institutional and services benefit levels.

References

Anderson, J.C. and Gerbing, D.W. (1988), ‘‘Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and

recommended two-step approach’’, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 103 No. 3, pp. 411-23.

Balkin, D.B. and Gomez-Mejia, R.L. (1990), ‘‘Matching compensation and organizational strategies’’,

Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 153-69.

Bartol, K.M. and Srivastava, A. (2002), ‘‘Encouraging knowledge sharing: the role of organizational

reward systems’’, Journal of Leadership and Organization Studies, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 64-76.

Bock, G.-W., Zmud, R., Kim, Y. and Lee, J.N. (2005), ‘‘Behavioral intention formation in knowledge

sharing: examining the roles of extrinsic motivator, social-psychological forces and organizational

climate’’, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 87-111.

Bonner, S. and Sprinkle, G. (2002), ‘‘The effects of monetary incentives on effort and task performance:

theories, evidence, and a framework for research’’, Accounting, Organizations and Society, Vol. 27

Nos 4/5, pp. 303-45.

Burgess, D. (2005), ‘‘What motivates employees to transfer knowledge outside their work unit?’’, Journal

of Business Communication, Vol. 42 No. 4, pp. 324-48.

Challagalla, G.N. and Shervani, T.A. (1996), ‘‘Dimensions and types of supervision control: effects on

salesperson performance and satisfaction’’, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 60 No. 1, pp. 89-105.

Collins, R. and Yeager, J.L. (1988), ‘‘Staff evaluation and incentive practices utilized by behavioral

science research organizations: a pilot study’’, Journal of the Society of Research Administrators, Vol. 20

No. 1, pp. 119-29.

Cyert, R.M. andMarch, J.G. (1963), A Behavioral Theory of the Firm, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

Das, S.R. and Joshi, M.P. (2007), ‘‘Process innovativeness in technology services organizations: Roles

of differentiation strategy, operational autonomy and risk-taking propensity’’, Journal of Operations

Management, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 643-60.

Delaney, J.T. and Huselid, M.A. (1996), ‘‘The impact of human resource management practices on

perceptions of organizational performance’’, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 39 No. 4,

pp. 949-69.

Finkelstein, S. and Hambrick, D.C. (1989), ‘‘Chief executive compensation: a study of the intersection of

markets and political processes’’, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 121-34.

PAGE 488 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENTj VOL. 13 NO. 6 2009

Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), ‘‘Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables

and measurement error’’, Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50.

Guallino, G. and Prevot, F. (2008), ‘‘Competence-building through organizational recognition or

frequency of use: Case study of the lafarge group’s development of competence in managing

post-merger cultural integration’’, Advances in Applied Business Strategy, Vol. 11, pp. 63-92.

Hall, H. (2001), ‘‘Input-friendliness: motivating knowledge sharing across intranets’’, Journal of

Information Science, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 139-46.

Handy, F. and Katz, E. (1998), ‘‘The wage differential between non-profit institutions and corporations:

getting more by paying less?’’, Journal of Comparative Economics, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 246-61.

Hansen, F., Smith, M. and Hansen, R.B. (2002), ‘‘Rewards and recognition in employee motivation’’,

Compensation and Benefits Review, Vol. 34, pp. 64-72.

Hendriks, P. (1999), ‘‘Why share knowledge? The influence of ICT on the motivation for knowledge

sharing’’, Knowledge and Process Management, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 91-100.

Huysman, M. and de Wit, D. (2004), ‘‘Practices of managing knowledge sharing: towards a second

wave of knowledge management’’, Knowledge and Process Management, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 81-92.

Ko, D.-G., Kirsch, L.J. and King, W.R. (2005), ‘‘Antecedents of knowledge transfer from consultants to

clients in enterprise system implementations’’, MIS Quarterly, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 59-85.

Kofman, F. and Senge, P.M. (1993), ‘‘Communities of commitment: the heart of learning organizations’’,

Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 5-23.

Leete, L. (2000), ‘‘Wage equity and employee motivation in non-profit and for-profit organizations’’,

Journal of Economic and Behavior Organization, Vol. 43 No. 4, pp. 423-46.

Lin, H. (2007), ‘‘Effects of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation on employee knowledge sharing intentions’’,

Journal of Information Science, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 135-49.

Lucas, L.M. andOgilvie, D. (2006), ‘‘Things are not always what they seem. How reputations, culture and

incentives influence knowledge transfer’’, The Learning Organization, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 7-24.

McDermott, R. and O’Dell, C. (2001), ‘‘Overcoming cultural barriers to sharing knowledge’’, Journal of

Knowledge Management, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 76-85.

Merchant, K.A., Van der Stede, W.A. and Zheng, L. (2003), ‘‘Disciplinary constraints on the

advancement of knowledge: the case of organizational incentive systems’’, Accounting, Organizations

and Society, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 251-86.

Mirvis, P.H. and Hackett, E.J. (1983), ‘‘Work and work force characteristics in the non-profit sector’’,

Monthly Labor Review, Vol. 106 No. 4, pp. 3-12.

Oliver, R.L. and Anderson, E. (1994), ‘‘An empirical test of the consequences of behavior and

outcome-based sales control systems’’, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58 No. 4, pp. 53-67.

Osterloh, M. and Frey, B. (2000), ‘‘Motivation, knowledge transfer and organizational forms’’,

Organization Science, Vol. 11 No. 5, pp. 538-50.

Perry, J.L. and Porter, L.W. (1982), ‘‘Factors affecting the context for motivation in public organizations’’,

The Academy of Management Review, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 89-98.

Prendergast, C. (1999), ‘‘The provision of incentives in firms’’, Journal of Economic Literature, Vol. 37

No. 1, pp. 7-63.

Ringle, C.M., Wende, S. and Will, A. (2005), SmartPLS 2.0 (Beta), University of Hamburg, Hamburg,

Germany, available at: www.smartpls.de

Robinson, S.L. (1996), ‘‘Trust and breach of the psychological contract’’, Administrative Science

Quarterly, Vol. 41 No. 4, pp. 574-99.

Rodrıguez Pinto, J., Rodrıguez Escudero, A. and Gutierrez Cillan, J. (2008), ‘‘Order, positioning, scope

and outcomes of market entry’’, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 37 No. 2, pp. 154-66.

Roomkin, M.J. and Weisbrod, B.A. (1999), ‘‘Managerial compensation and incentives in for-profit and

non-profit hospitals’’, Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Vol. 15 No. 3, pp. 750-81.

VOL. 13 NO. 6 2009 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENTj PAGE 489

Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L. (2000), ‘‘Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: classic definitions and new

directions’’, Contemporary Educational Psychology, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 54-67.

Scapens, R.W. (1990), ‘‘Researching management accounting practice: the role of case study

methods’’, British Accounting Review, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 259-81.

Slater, S.F. and Narver, J.C. (1995), ‘‘Market orientation and the learning organization’’, Journal of

Marketing, Vol. 59 No. 3, pp. 63-74.

Tampoe, M. (1996), ‘‘Motivating knowledge workers: the challenge for the 1990s’’, in Myers, P.S. (Ed.),

Knowledge Management and Organisational Design, Butterworth-Heinemann, Boston, MA, pp. 179-90.

Tyler, T. (2003), ‘‘Trust within organizations’’, Personnel Review, Vol. 32 No. 5, pp. 556-68.

Walsh, J.P. (1995), ‘‘Managerial and organizational cognition: notes from a trip down memory lane’’,

Organization Science, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 280-321.

Yin, R.K. (2003), Case Study Research, Design and Methods, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.

Zarraga, C. and Bonache, J. (2003), ‘‘The impact of team atmosphere on knowledge outcomes in

self-managed teams’’, Organization Studies, Vol. 26 No. 5, pp. 661-81.

About the authors

Natalia Martın Cruz is Professor in the Business Department at the University of Valladolid.Her research interests are non-profit strategy and corporate governance, entrepreneurship,pharmaceutical strategy and regulation. Natalia Martın Cruz is the corresponding author andcan be contacted at: ambiela@eco.uva.es

Vıctor Martın Perez is an assistant professor in the Business Department at the University ofValladolid. His research interests are non-profit organizational architecture, organizationalefficiency and teamwork skills.

Celina Trevilla Cantero is a PhD candidate in the doctoral program ‘‘New trends in businessmanagement’’ at the University of Valladolid, Spain. Her research interest are relative to thestudy of the influence of motivation and knowledge transfer in organizations in general,including non-profits.

PAGE 490 j JOURNAL OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENTj VOL. 13 NO. 6 2009

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints